NCLT Admits Infiiloom India to CIRP on ₹341.32 Crore Debenture Default Claim
The National Company Law Tribunal’s Mumbai Bench-VI has admitted Infiiloom India Private Limited into the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) on a Section 7 application filed by Catalyst Trusteeship Limited in its capacity as debenture trustee. The order in CP (IB) No. 411/MB/2026 was pronounced on September 4, 2026. The Bench also dismissed IA 2408/2026 filed by Infiiloom and declared the statutory moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
What the financial creditor placed before NCLT
According to the order, Infiiloom had raised an aggregate ₹260 crore through privately placed secured debentures. The funding comprised ₹160 crore of unlisted, secured, redeemable non-convertible debentures and ₹100 crore of unlisted, secured, redeemable optionally convertible debentures. Both sets of instruments were governed by debenture trust deeds dated August 14, 2024, later amended on August 27, 2024. Catalyst Trusteeship was appointed as debenture trustee.
The order records that the debenture structure was backed by a wider security package that included mortgages, charges over movable and other assets, share pledges and corporate and personal guarantees. The financial creditor alleged multiple non-payment and non-payment-related defaults, including failures connected with security perfection, account-bank approvals and specified contractual obligations.
Default notices, recall and amounts cited in the order
A notice dated August 11, 2025 sought cure of defaults and demanded ₹3.90 crore of accrued default interest for the period from November 1, 2024 to July 31, 2025. A final reminder dated January 9, 2026 demanded an updated ₹6.0667 crore of default interest through December 31, 2025. The order then records a fresh payment default from February 28, 2026.
On March 6, 2026, Catalyst Trusteeship issued a recall notice on the instructions of the debenture holders and accelerated the facility. The recall notice demanded about ₹337.26 crore within seven days. Part IV of the insolvency application, however, stated total outstanding financial debt of ₹341.32 crore as on March 30, 2026. This distinction matters: NCLT expressly said at the admission stage that it had not crystallised the amount claimed and left collation of the claims to the interim resolution professional.
Why the Section 7 petition was admitted
The Bench said the application was complete and that the material showed financial debt in default above the statutory ₹1 crore threshold. It relied on the record of default from the information utility and noted that the corporate debtor had not denied the disbursement and default. The Tribunal held that disputes about interpretation of the debenture trust deeds, deferments, restructuring discussions, contractual notices and related proceedings did not displace the documentary evidence of financial debt and payment default for the purpose of Section 7 admission.
The corporate debtor had also invoked Section 65 of the IBC, which deals with fraudulent or malicious initiation of proceedings. NCLT found no material on record establishing that the insolvency petition had been initiated fraudulently or with malicious intent. It therefore dismissed IA 2408/2026 and held that the objections raised did not create a legal impediment to admission.
Moratorium begins; Pulkit Gupta appointed IRP
The Tribunal appointed Pulkit Gupta, registration number IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P-02364/2021-2022/13697, as interim resolution professional. His authorisation for assignment was recorded as valid up to June 30, 2027. The order requires an immediate public announcement under Section 13 read with Regulation 6 of the CIRP Regulations. Management of Infiiloom will vest in the IRP/RP during the process, and the company’s officers and managers have been directed to assist the insolvency professional.
The Section 14 moratorium restricts institution or continuation of proceedings against the corporate debtor, transfer or disposal of its assets, enforcement of security interests and recovery of property in its possession, subject to the Code. Essential supplies, if continuing, are not to be terminated or interrupted during the moratorium period. The moratorium will remain in force until completion of CIRP or until a resolution plan is approved or liquidation is ordered, as applicable.
Immediate compliance points for finance and insolvency teams
- Creditors should watch for the CIRP public announcement and submit claims in the prescribed manner within the timelines stated by the IRP.
- Finance, legal and compliance teams dealing with Infiiloom should reassess recovery, set-off, enforcement and pending-proceeding actions in light of the Section 14 moratorium.
- The amount ultimately admitted as claims may differ from figures stated in the Section 7 application because NCLT expressly left claim collation to the IRP.
- The order directs the applicant to deposit ₹3 lakh with the IRP toward initial CIRP costs, subject to the treatment specified by the Tribunal.
Practical takeaway: the order is a useful reminder that, at the Section 7 admission stage, the core inquiry is whether a qualifying financial debt and default are established. The detailed quantum of admitted claims is then handled within the CIRP claims process. The complete NCLT order is available through the IBBI-hosted official PDF.
Official source: View the official source document
Key takeaway
NCLT Mumbai has admitted Infiiloom India to CIRP on Catalyst Trusteeship’s Section 7 plea, declared a moratorium and appointed Pulkit Gupta as IRP, while leaving final claim quantum for collation in CIRP.
